5 ms·
I served on a jury a year ago and I came away with a greater belief in their importance. The case in question a week-long criminal trial of a police detective
by saryant 10y ago
I served on a jury a year ago and I came away with a greater belief in their importance.
The case in question a week-long criminal trial of a police detective who tipped off a suspected child predator of his impending arrest. The charges were obstruction of justice, abuse of power and aiding in the sexual assault of a minor.
One notable difference between jury trials in Colorado and elsewhere is that Colorado gives judges the option of allowing jurors to submit their own questions of witnesses. Much of the case hinged on an email the detective had sent the child predator, so of course the defense tried to obfuscate by throwing up smoke screens to confuse the jury.
Two of us on the jury were software engineers. We were allowed to question both the defense's computer forensic expert and the state's. We were allowed to directly examine records subpoenaed from Google, Yahoo, Craigslist and various ISP's.
A Colorado jury isn't just a silent observer, we were active participants (though we never spoke—questions were written and submitted anonymously to the judge, who had discretion on which to allow, and counsel was given the chance to object to each question before it was read aloud to the witness).
In the end, we found him guilty. And I have no doubt we were correct.
- erelde 10y agoIt reminds me of the recent Google/Oracle trial, where both parties got rid of all computer literate persons in the jury. "Peers" in that case, maybe should have meant "people able to understand the technicalities", engineers and software lawyers.
- tveita 10y agoSo in the end you served not just as a jury, but also as an expert witness that the defense was not allowed to examine the credentials of, hear the statements made, or question? I'm glad you're certain in your conclusions, but in my mind there's a worry that that kind of "back-seat testimony" makes the trial less transparent and fair.
- jessaustin 10y agoIt says right there that they could raise objections before the expert or jury heard the question. If the question were unfair or misleading I'm sure they would. If you think that there aren't several confident know-it-all types who never get cross-examined on every jury everywhere ever, you wouldn't make a very good defense attorney.
- saryant 10y agoThe job of the jury is to determine the credibility of both the evidence and the witnesses. The idea that this somehow morphed me into a shadow expert witness is a very uncharitable reading.
- CPLX 10y agoIndeed. In fact given the extremely specific and unusual fact pattern and mention of jurisdiction, that post itself might well end up used to launch an appeal.
- saryant 10y agoThat would be the case, if anyone on the jury hadn't followed the judge's orders.
- maxxxxx 10y agoThat's good. I served on a jury earlier this yes (in CA) and I would have loved to ask some questions.